Quixtar's 70% Rule - You must sell

Sharon Grider - Chief Legal Officer Despite what the Quixtar lines of sponsorship say  about not needing to sell, the Quixtar legal department has a different opinion.  This straight from Quixtar's response page to the dateline show.  Of course sales to retail customers are need to protect the business from being classified as an illegal pyramid scheme.

logo_audio.gif (483 bytes)Shaon Grider - Quixtar Legal
"Our 70% rules provides that for in order to receive a
bonus you must sell at least  at least 70% of the product
                          in any give month that you purchase from Quixtar."
Sharon Grider - Quixtar Chief Legal Officer

[Pyramid Q & A] [Is it a Pyramid?] [Pyramid Primer]

Wow!  This is amazingly clear.  What I want to know is if this rule is so important, how come they don't enforce it?  I would think Ms. Grider in the legal department needs to send Mr. VanderVen in the Quixtar rules department an E-mail that he needs to start enforcing the rule.    Ms. Grider also needs to inform Ron Mitchell in the rules administration department.  In the letter below to a Quixtar diamond Mr. Mitchell says that personal consumption satisfies as sales.  This counter to what the Quixtar legal department says above.

Ron Mitchell 70% letter

We know the majority of IBOs are just "buying from themselves" and how it pays to be a "pro-sumer", and how you just need to "change your buying habits" and become rich with the Quixtar business.   We would not want a State Attorney General or even the FTC to come along and accuse them of not following their own rules.

Here is a definition of "sell" from the Internet:
"To transfer to another for an equivalent; to give up for a valuable consideration; to dispose of in return for something, especially for money."

I guess since the definition uses the phrase "To transfer to another", sell cannot mean "transferring to yourself".

http://www.mlmlaw.com/saleswatch/omnitrition.html

The court's analysis of Omnitrition's application of the 70% rule is one of the strongest statements in the decision that sales to distributors do not qualify as a sale to the ultimate user. On this point, the court held:

[P]laintiffs have produced evidence that the 70% rule can be satisfied by a distributor's personal use of the products. If Koscot is to have any teeth, such a sale cannot satisfy the requirement that sales be to "ultimate users" of a product.11

To further drive home the point that distributors are not the "ultimate users" (retail customers) of Omnitrition's products, the court pointed out that the company does not treat distributors the same as true retail customers. Under Omnitrition's product satisfaction guarantee, retail customers are entitled to return the products within 30 days for a refund. This same offer was not extended to distributors who purchased Omnitrition products for personal consumption

back to the home page